Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) declared incumbent President Peter Mutharika the narrow winner of a May 2019 vote despite cries of foul play. Calling the results "daylight robbery", two opposition parties petitioned the constitutional court to review the election as the dispute spilled on to the streets.Broadcast live in both English and Chichewa, the months-long court proceedings gripped Malawi. February 3 was Judgement Day, and the nation was on tenterhooks as Potani began shortly after 9am to deliver the court's 500-page ruling.
It would take more than 10 hours to read it in full, but the judges early on detailed a laundry list of gross irregularities, including the widespread use of the infamous Tipp-Ex correction fluid on ballot papers to alter figures. Glued to their radios, Malawians heard that the MEC's actions "demonstrated incompetence" and "greatly undermined the integrity of the elections".
A new vote should be held within 150 days, the judges unanimously ordered, sparking mass celebrations by opposition supporters.
Mutharika slammed the verdict as a "serious miscarriage of justice" and, along with the MEC, filed an appeal. But on May 8, the Supreme Court upheld the earlier ruling, setting the stage for Malawians to return to the polls again on Tuesday to pick their next president.
In last year's nullified vote, the 79-year-old incumbent - an academic and brother of former president, the late Bingu wa Mutharika - was handed a second term in office with 38.57 percent of the vote, slightly ahead of his main challenger, Lazarus Chakwera, at 35.41 percent.This time, however, merely garnering the most votes will not be enough. In their landmark ruling, the five-judge panel stipulated that a presidential candidate must secure an absolute majority to be declared the winner.
This is a game-changer.
"It is clear that no political party, as contested during the 2019 elections, would get the 50 percent plus one vote - so alliances have become the most obvious alternative," said Jimmy Kainja, lecturer in media, communication and cultural studies at the University of Malawi.
The two parties behind last year's legal challenge, the Malawi Congress Party (MCP), headed by Chakwera, and the United Transformation Movement (UTM), announced in March that they would team up in the election re-run.
Chakwera, a 65-year-old pastor turned politician, was chosen to lead the newly formed Tonse Alliance, which also includes several smaller parties. His running mate is Saulos Chilima, UTM leader and Mutharika's former deputy who finished third in last year's poll. Combined, the pair's official 2019 vote tally surges to almost 56 percent, well above the threshold that guarantees an outright win.
For its part, Mutharika's governing Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) joined forces with the United Democratic Front (UDF), led by Atupele Muluzi, the son of former President Bakili Muluzi. If they repeat last year's electoral performance, the joint DPP-UFF ticket would gather a little more than 43 percent.Unsurprisingly, analysts say Mutharika has tried to stall the electoral process.
Since the court's decision in February, he has refused to sign bills that would have paved the way for the fresh vote, and he sought to reverse the adoption of the 50 percent +1 electoral rule. He also appointed a new commission just 16 days before this week's vote and left two commission members in place despite the fact they were deemed incompetent by the courts and parliament.
"I strongly believe that he thought through various machinations at his disposal he would be able to frustrate the elections and hang on to power," said Blessings Chinsinga, professor of political economy at Chancellor College, University of Malawi.
Mutharika insists he was legitimately elected and has cast himself as a victim of a "judicial coup d'etat". But having lost nearly all of his recent court battles, the former law professor and his circle have repeatedly expressed anger at the judiciary. And on June 12, Mutharika upped the ante by attempting to forcibly retire one of the Supreme Court justices.
